Don’t Let The Slop Break Your Brain
Many right-wing personalities are letting the cringe get the best of them
I was asked on this week’s Highly Respected about a recent podcast between Alex Kaschuta and Pedro Gonzalez, two conservative influencers who’ve decided the Right now sucks. Now that the podcast was covered by the New York Times, it seems appropriate to write a whole column on the matter.
Times columnist Michelle Goldberg saw the podcast as a sign of an alleged “vibe shift against the Right.” Goldberg also included in this trend Highly Respected frenemy Richard Hanania, academic Nathan Cofnas, and blogger Scott Siskind. They all apparently find the Dissident Right stupid and Trump a bad president. Goldberg particularly focused on Kaschuta’s disenchantment:
When [Kaschuta] looks back on the milieu she was once a part of, she said, she sees no solid ideas for a post-liberal society — it was all just aesthetics, resentments and vibes. “And now the vibes have knocked into reality,” she said. “And it is so jarring to see that none of the vibes stand up to scrutiny. None of the vibes actually fit onto the 21st century. None of the vibes, if implemented, would lead to anything but immiseration and war.”
These figures differ on their reasons for turning against the Dissident Right. Affirmative action conservative Pedro Gonzalez backed the wrong horse in the 2024 primary, blew up relationships over Trump, and decided tweeting about the president like a jilted ex-lover made for good content. Others on the Right stopped paying attention, so he now acts like he left the Right. Others on the list were never Trump supporters or are committed contrarians.
While I think it’s stupid to decide to become a “post-Right critic,” there are grounds for feeling annoyed over the state of online discourse. If you’re extremely online (as most readers probably are), you’re inundated with some of the dumbest content imaginable day in and day out. “Slop” is the only way to call it, and it reigns supreme on X. It can break people’s minds, which is why it’s important to stay above it and focus on the big picture. The Right is making real progress in the real world; the online content shouldn’t distract from that.
The timeline on X, however, often seems retarded. The fake AI videos, completely made up conspiracy theories, ads from literal schizophrenics, and endlessly recycled memes make it a race to the bottom with the lowest common denominator coming out as the winner. It’s how X became an epicenter of space laser theories on the California wildfires. Whatever titillates stupid people and makes influencers money will be broadcast to the world.
This is a core element of the “Insane Clown Party.” The ICP covers the idiotic elements of the Right that stress entertainment above all else and want politics to resemble a carnival. This audience remains easy prey for charlatans who hock crypto scams and dubious medical advice.
Not everything that’s tiring is ICP, though. There are also terrible takes that get massive engagement and end up influencing important people. Last week, I pushed back against the nihilistic defense of tariffs, which hoped they would destroy the economy, pauperize the middle class, and force college grads to become miners. Liberals said the same things about the tariffs to criticize them. But for many right-wingers, these were arguments for the tariffs.
X incentivizes people to post insane nonsense. For those who retain good sense, it can become too much. Some may even ponder turning on the Right over the deluge of slop.
That’s just as dumb as the content farmer who blames the Pennsylvania governor’s house fire on space lasers.
The stupidity of X is still better than the censorship of Twitter. We are able to speak our minds without fear of getting banned. Some may abuse this privilege to lie and spew idiocy, but that’s just how free speech works. More people come into contact with right-wing ideas than ever before due to X. The slop is a side effect of progress. As the Right reaches a larger audience, things become, well, dumber. Bigger accounts want more engagement and higher payouts. They won’t post things that will fly over the audience’s head or anger them. They will stick to giving them what they want, which unfortunately tends to be slop.
It’s not just “post-right” people who are tired of the slop. Many on the Right are tired of the ICP and its reign of retardation. There are a number of prominent accounts who would like to see X discontinue its payout system to discourage the scourge of slop. But most of those calling for this measure aren’t turning on the Right. They just can’t stand the ICP element.
The most important thing you can do is to not let the slop break your brain. One can just log off and go outside for a bit. The Right is actually doing things in the real world. It’s not entirely online. This is critical to keep in mind as you scroll the timeline and see nothing but trash. There’s more to politics than tweets.
There are two wrong ways to respond to the slop. One is to become a slop merchant like Ian Miles Cheong and cater to the lowest common denominator. The other is to become a whiny, post-Right contrarian where you outwardly try to counter-signal everything that is popular among right-wingers. People can disagree from the Online Right consensus, and sometimes it’s necessary to do so. These disagreements don’t make one a contrarian so long as these positions are rooted in consistent principles. But the super contrarians ditch principles and scour for any reason to counter-signal. They will be economic nationalists when they can attack Trump, and then switch to free trade absolutists when he imposes tariffs. The ultimate contrarian is Richard Spencer. The former Alt Right leader now spends his days worshipping NATO, supporting Kamala Harris, and defending the woke Snow White. The only principle is contrarianism.
It’s not a binary choice between Cheong and Spencer. One can go beyond slop and counter-signaling and just be Right.
There are unprecedented opportunities and progress amid all the cringe. Completely changing your worldview over a tweet is dumb. Just ignore the slop and stick to basic principles. It’s that simple.
"These figures [HAVE] different reasons for turning against the Dissident Right."
Good article nonetheless
Assuming that their objections to the state of the "Dissident Right" are genuine and not mere pretexts for their personal resentments, it would have been more constructive for them to use their platforms (which were not inconsiderable) to exert a positive influence, instead of going crying to Michelle Goldberg at the New York Times. That's why I subscribed to "Highly Respected," to contribute to the elevation of the discourse on the Right.